High bit depth support, non-destructive editing (so called "effect layers") and colour management. Three hot topics in photography editing - that users have been waiting for for a long time now to appear in GIMP. Today Linux & Photography blog features an exclusive interview with Martin Nordholts, one of the core contributors to GIMP. Nordholts speaks about the current state of affairs, explains what is going on deep inside the GIMP (and GEGL) and also lifts a corner of the veil about what is to come.

I think that's a matter of taste. I don't think the UI is as bad as you make it out to be. Plus I love the separated windows (SDI interface) vs the clunky MDI interface of PhotoShop and most Windows programs.

Also as an author of open source software myself, it is very irritating when users simply demand features! That does not help the cause and does NOT help motivate developers either. Open source software is driven by contributers, so stop b*tching and contribute by submitting patches.

Also as an author of open source software myself, it is very irritating when users simply demand features! That does not help the cause and does NOT help motivate developers either. Open source software is driven by contributers, so stop b*tching and contribute by submitting patches.

As an open source developer, you're going to have to get used to it. As evangelists continue to preach that open source software is the only true path to God, you're going to get some converts, and those converts are going to start bitching if/when they notice any shortcomings in your software. Very few of them will be able to contribute code, because they're not programmers, nor should they be.

Wow. Those darned users. Always demanding improvements. The nerve. Things would be ever so much easier and quieter without users.

In all seriousness though -- open source software can't, nor should it, operate in a vacuum. Without feedback from people using the software, it's never going to improve, at least not at any rate that would satisfy the targeted audience.

While I can understand the irritation and/or annoyance expressed, it's also not realistic -- the vast majority of software users are not, nor will they ever be, programmers capable of contributing to an open source programming project.

I know from my own experience that when I'm working on a pet project, it's very, VERY irritating to have someone come along and suggest that there are missing or broken features -- I get a serious set of blinders on, and just don't see any problems until they're pointed out ... much to my chagrin Of course, everything I work on is perfect *cough* and doesn't need any "steeeeenking users" to voice an opinion.

The open source community can sometimes show the same behavior -- anyone not intimately involved in the nitty gritty details of programming the underlying guts of the project is unfortunately viewed as an impediment. Yes, lots of times the opinions voiced aren't very well thought out, and sometimes they're far beyond practical; and yet, painting all opinions with the same brush is doing users, past, present & potential, a pretty serious disservice.

Enough pontificating ... I'll climb down off of my soapbox -- the altitude is giving me a nosebleed

Sure, I'll just pull my trusty old C book and learn programming and submit a patch. Or ... maybe I'll try another project, or maybe I'll buy a commercial application. Or maybe if the developer is not an ass, I'll make a donation.

Nothing wrong with SDI, but they could do it right, you know. I mean ... I want to see only documents on my taskbar, not the toolbox, the layer palette, the swatches and so on ...

Also, let me tell you, as a user of some open source software, it is very irritating when developers ask people to submit patches just to shut them up. Reality check - probably only 1% of the users of most open source applications are programmers. And probably only half of them have the skills to submit patches. And probably only half of that would also have the time.